4.3 Article

KIT amplification and gene mutations in acral/mucosal melanoma in Korea

Journal

APMIS
Volume 119, Issue 6, Pages 330-335

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0463.2011.02737.x

Keywords

Acral melanoma; mucosal melanoma; melanoma; KIT gene; KIT amplification; KIT mutation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mucosal and acral melanomas have demonstrated different genetic alterations and biological behavior compared with more common cutaneous melanomas. It was recently reported that gain-of-function KIT mutations and/or copy number increases are more common in mucosal and acral melanomas. Thus, we studied the frequency and pattern of KIT aberrations in mucosal and acral melanomas in Korea. We analyzed 97 patients who were pathologically confirmed with mucosal or acral melanoma between 1997 and 2010 at Samsung Medical Center. Of the 97 melanoma patients, 92 were screened for mutations in KIT exons 11, 13, 17, and 18, BRAF and NRAS genes. KIT copy number was assessed by quantitative, real-time PCR. Of the 97 patients, 55 (56.7%) were mucosal, 40 (41.2%) were acral melanoma, and two were of unknown primary origin. Among seven cases with KIT mutation, five (60.0%) occurred in exon 11, one (20.0%) in exon 17, and one (20.0%) in exon 13. Point mutations were the most common, resulting in substitutions in exon 11 (K558R, T574A, L576P, and V559A), exon 13 (N655K), and exon 17 (N822K). A novel Thr574Ala (c.1720A > G) KIT mutation, which has not been reported in melanoma or other tumor types, was identified in one genital melanoma case. Of the 97 mucosal or acral melanoma specimens, 49 were tested for KIT gene copy number changes using quantitative PCR. Increased KIT copy number was identified in 15 patients: seven (40%) of 20 acral melanomas and eight (31%) of 26 mucosal melanomas. Our study implicates that a significant proportion of acral and mucosal melanomas have KIT mutations in Asian population.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available